JUDGMENT : I.A. No. 835 of 2016 The application is for condonation of delay of 40 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. 2. For the reasons mentioned in the Interlocutory Application, we are satisfied that the appellant has shown sufficient cause to seek condonation of delay of 40 days in filing the present Letters Patent Appeal. 3. Consequently, Interlocutory Application No. 835 of 2016 is allowed and delay of 40 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. L.P.A. No. 217 of 2016 The challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is to an order passed by the learned Single Bench in C.W.J.C. No. 806 of 2011 whereby, the writ application filed by the appellant for his appointment as Dafadar/Choukidar in lieu of his grand-father remained unsuccessful. The appellant relies upon the recommendation dated 14.2.1990 by his grandfather recommending the appellant for appointment as Dafadar/Choukidar. It is on the said basis, the appellant claims right of appointment as Dafadar/Choukidar. 2. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3, it has been pointed out that Bihar Choukidar Sambarg Niyamawali, 2006 has been framed in respect of appointment of Dafadar/Choukidar, therefore, the appointments are to be made only in terms of the said Rules. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and find no merit in the present Letters Patent Appeal. The appellant cannot claim appointment to the post of Dafadar/Choukidar in lieu of the appointment of his grand-father as Dafadar/Choukidar. 4. It is neither a compassionate appointment nor a right of inheritance which the appellant claims for appointment as a Dafadar/Choukidar. There are statutory Rules framed and the appointments in question can be made only in accordance with Rules so notified. 5. Consequently, we do not find any merit in the present Letters Patent Appeal. The same is accordingly dismissed.